BLADE RUNNER (1982) MOVIE REACTION - IS HE ONE OF THEM!? - First Time Watching - Review
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 12. 2023
- Welcome to our first-time reaction to the Blade Runner (1982) movie. This film takes us through a journey into the dystopian future. Directed by the super talented Ridley Scott, this film did not disappoint. Considered a sci-fi masterpiece we can see just how much this movie alone has influenced the genre.
"Blade Runner" is a cyberpunk classic set in a future Los Angeles where Rick Deckard, played by Harrison Ford, is tasked with hunting down bioengineered beings known as replicants. The film is filled with thought-provoking themes and visually stunning cinematography that makes this such an incredible experience especially if you enjoy films having a certain amount of atmosphere.
We hope you enjoy our reactions, commentary and discussions as we delve into the film's impact on the genre, and the profound questions it poses about humanity and what it means to be a human and artificial intelligence.
With some great performances by Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, Sean Young and the fantastic score composed by Vangelis this movie has plenty to give!
So sit back and relax as we immerse ourselves into the cyber-punky world of Blade Runner.
If you'd like to support the channel and gain access to the full length reaction become a member of our patreon bit.ly/3ICVrJ6
Watch our reactions early! / @officialmediaknights
#BladeRunner #Reaction #TheMediaKnights - Zábava
Thank you guys for checking this one out with us! We hope you enjoy. What were your thoughts the first time you watched this?
If you'd like to support the channel and gain access to the full length reaction become a member of our patreon bit.ly/3ICVrJ6
Watch our reactions early! czcams.com/channels/iCUz1bHid4H9mu6g2IOjXg.htmljoin
DACKER IS NEXUS 7 UNKOWN LIFE SPAN UNICORN IS DACKERS INPLANT THATS WHY COP MADE UNICORN FOR HIM HE KNOWS DACKER DREAM OF UNICORN rachael NEXUS 8 NEW MODEL UNKOWN LIFE SPAN THERE WAS NO MORE BLADE RUNNERS LEFT ON EARTH SO THEY MADE DECKER TO STAY ON EARTH AS BLADE RUNNER
"What makes someone human?" You nailed the central question of the movie...
Would you believe this movie bombed when it was released?
@@n0tk0sher Yes the sheep were flocking to see "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" when they should have been watching this instead.
How can Deckard be "one of them" when he got his ass kicked by Batty?
An absolute cyberpunk, neo-noir MASTERPIECE! Rutger Hauer's "Tears in the rain" speech is some of the best movie dialogue EVER.
Yessss!! That speech and the entire feel of the movie is so incredibly unique and fully encapsulates you. Such a great film!
If you visit the Columbarium in Night City in Cyberpunk, you'll find a niche in the back for Roy Batty.
Also it was improvised by the actor.
One of the greatest moment in modern cinema
@@AzraelArch Ain't no way. I actually don't believe you, that would be wild.
@@cassu6
it is. That's what makes this moment so charming and unique. So humane
Rutger Hauer's Tears in rain was and always will be one of the most profound scii monologues ever. He actually altered the dialogue from what was originally written, and for the better. RIP Rutger
Yep. He added the "tears in the rain" part. Genius move.
This movie taught me the importance of repeated viewings back in the day. As a kid, the first time I watched it I fell asleep and thought it was boring. As a teen I gave it another chance and thought "it's not as bad as I remembered" and ever since, every time I watch it again it is better than the previous time.
Yep.
A more recent example of this for me would be "Zodiac" (2007). First time I watched it I thought it was middling-good but no great shakes. Then I watched it a second time and got a lot more out of it. Multiple viewings later, I would rank it as my favourite movie of the last twenty years.
This movie taught me the importance of viewing the proper cut. I watched the final cut first and loved it IMMENSELY. Years later I watched it with my gf and her friends except they had the original release and hooboy, that was a shock. Thank god I saw the final cut first because idk if I’d have liked the movie at all if I saw the theatrical release first. In particular, I found Fords overdubbed monologues infuriating.
I agree about rewatching Blade Runner. It gets better each time. I had a similar experience with the movie Signs. When it came out I expected an Alien action movie like Independence Day. My first time watching I thought Signs was boring and a big disappointment. I rewatched the movie a few years later, after discovering the Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. I had expected a big plot twist. Once again I was disappointed, because there wasn’t really a twist. A few years later I again watched Signs and it was on the third viewing where it clicked with me and I was able to appreciate it.
have you watched the ORIGINAL narrated theatrical version yet? ALMOST a different movie
First time I saw it as a kid I half watched it and thought it was alright. Second time, as a teen, I watched the Director's Cut and fell in love. I've watched it endless times since and I relish the experience every time I do.
roy in his last moments realized the value of life and didnt want his last action to be one of hate but one of mercy.
I always felt Roy was teaching Decard a lesson, showing him how easily he could have killed him and showing his humanity. By saving him it was a very human choice, its such a complex scene
and the released dove was symbolic of HIM meeting "the god of bio mechanics" and getting into heaven
The soundtrack by Vangelis is absolutely amazing- the previous year, he gained a lot of praise for his soundtrack work for "Chariots Of Fire".
Vangelis's OST for Bladerunner is my favourite film soundtrack of all time.
@@Sektion9 - back when I was a record store manager, a co-worker would always play this over the speakers.
@@kellypedersen6590 I would have bought alot of vinyl from your store ;) . Btw have you ever checked out the Esper edition of the Blade Runner score ?
What makes the "Like tears in rain" speech even better is that the actor, Rutger Hauer (may he rest in peace), made that up on the spot.
Rutger talking about that last scene. czcams.com/video/W85RHpe_obE/video.htmlsi=gaM6q04iD6g65y7F
The Director talking about it czcams.com/video/uPUIDHQv8rM/video.htmlsi=qVhhKSdBVbUZfLhs
Not quite on the spot. He wrote it the night before the shoot. He found the version in the script to be kooky and not at all what Roy would say.
I'm Dutch and I never knew Hauer was a poet.
Turns out he was.
Hell of a line,fits the story like a glove. Ty.
I genuinely weep for Roy every time I watch this film. He wasn’t born a monster. He was made a monster through his short lifetime of slavery and abuse, and all he wanted was a chance at a life of his own with the people he cared about like any of us.
"It's too bad she won't live...but then again, who does?" is a line that has stayed with me for years. It's the whole essence of this masterwork of a movie - who lives? Who is alive? What is humanity? Really glad you watched this one. This movie is a masterpiece !
Harrison is great in this film, but Rutger Hauer (RIP) is fantastic. So glad you reacted to this. Byron James (RIP) as Leon, Joe Turkel,(RIP) as Tyrel, who was also the bartender in The Shinning.
Remember Byron James in The Fifth Element?
And Beverly Hills Cop 2
@@mikerodgers7620 , yes, and a memorable appearance in the Highlander TV series, and side character role in Silverado.
@@mikerodgers7620 It's actually Brion James rather than Byron.
Okay, my auto correct spell checker misspelled his name. I have to take this thing off.@@bonglesnodkins329
This is one of those movies where you'll definitely have to circle back to appreciate it.
We’re gonna need another viewing to get the most out of it for sure!
@@OfficialMediaKnightsI think for first time viewing, the original theatrical version is the best. Harrison Ford's narration throughout the film really helps the film. Everyone will say the director's cut is best, but that's because they've already had the help of Harrison Ford's answers and characters viewpoints.
@@rdramos13 Interesting. This has been my favorite film for forty years, and you may be right. You're supposed to show, not tell, in movies, and a voice over is considered a cheat, but yeah, narratively speaking, this left most people baffled at the time of release, even with the narration. I know because I was there. But I was so blown away by the visuals that I didn't give shit. And still don't.
@@rdramos13 Yeah, and having the narration really leaves no doubt that it was intended to be futuristic noir, very much a callback to old school noir.
now circle back and watch the original narrated theatrical cut. i hate the director's cuts myself
Deckard is a man with no passion for life, while Roy is a replicant passionate to live - this is their thematic parallel to me. So much going on in this movie though - absolutely best viewed as 'Art House' - my absolute favourite. Cheers for the Great Reaction.
DECKER IS A REPLICANT
@@sobrevaloradoRidley Scott has said so since but he kept it to himself while they were making the movie. Harrison Ford has said that nobody ever said to him at the time that his character was a Replicant and he would have liked to know it as a performer if he was. In any case, the sequel doesn’t do anything with that idea.
@@sobrevaloradohe's human, Ridley Scott is the only one pushing that narrative and it doesn't make sense
@@sobrevalorado That question is not answered in the film and therefore there is no answer (which is actually the whole point). Scott could come out and say Deckard's father was a snail - I wouldn't accept it. In my opinion, if Deckard is a replicant then the story has less impact (I agree with Frank Darabont's comments in Dangerous Days) - it becomes a divisive story (humans are the bad guys) as opposed to a unifying story where the lines are blurred between "us" and "them".
Ridley Scott wanted to suggest he was a replicant, but he did not write this story. Philip K. Dick confirms he is human in the book. Since either can be true, since it is left open-ended, interpret it however you wish.
You guys are just terrific reactors. Your reaction to finding out Rachel doesn’t know she’s a replicant was so earnest and descriptive of how we all felt about the possibilities being explored in this piece the first time we saw it, it was just great. There’s controversy over whether or not Deckard is human, because Ridley Scott wanted it that way. The author of the source material, Phillip K Dick, makes it clear in interviews that Deckard is a human struggling with a moral dilemma as he begins to see the replicants he’s retiring as people, but the question in the movie is intriguing. Great job as always. Keep them coming!
I think the story is better served if Deckard is human. In that last scene on the roof, he connects with Roy and understands how close to humans they are. If he were one of them, that empathy and realisation would not be as impactful. But it compliments Deckard's character arc beautifully, to go from a killer of replicants to a lover of one.
My favorite part of the story is how Deckard's attitude towards Rachel shifts after he tells her she's a replicant and she storms out of his apartment. When he first meets her he refers to her as an "it"
"How can it not know what it is?" he asks incredulously.
Then later after he gets home after a long day there this thing is lurking outside his door. Naturally he's rude and obnoxious towards what he views as little more than a walking talking sex doll. He just wants "it" to go away and leave him alone. He then examines the photo she drops on the floor. Later on the balcony by himself, he looks out over the city and ponders his actions. Following that his attitude changes to typical boy meets girl.
Thank you so much for taking the time and writing this. It means a lot to us to see you’ve enjoyed this. This movie was asking some pretty deep questions and sometimes it’s truly hard to dissect everything the way we normally do with just one viewing especially when it’s important themes and questions such as the ones this film asks. But honestly you’ve guys have been fantastic and allow us to express ourselves freely. Thank you for that and thank you for watching ❤️
@@Bonko78 THIS. I could not agree more. Ridley Scott, unfortunately, very much wants us to think of Deckard as a replicant, even though that doesn't really align with many elements of the plot. More importantly, as you said, it's far more interesting and meaningful to have a human fall in love with a replicant than a replicant fall in love with another replicant. Establishing that connection goes much further towards the story's goal of questioning what it really means to be human and the realization that there is little difference between us and them. The connection doesn't mean much if there is no boundary to reach across in the first place. Ridley's got style, but he can be a hamfisted storyteller sometimes.
@@vermithax Yes, I look at Ridley mainly as one of the greatest visual film makers of our time, but as a storyteller we often see he lacks the same depth. Take Kingom of heaven, with stunning visuals but a very generic, poorly executed hero story. And his Alien prequels seem like he just doesn't get what makes the original film so good.
Excellent reaction. I'm sure others have mentioned it, but the unicorn serves two purposes: either how unique Rachel is (being the only replicant implanted with memories, so indistinguishable from a human) or that Deckard himself might be a replicant (as his vision/dream of a unicorn could be known only to himself - unless it was implanted and Gaff knows - which casts the entire film differently if you watch it with that idea in mind and assume Bryant and Gaff know this).
But does the latter even serve a purpose? Remember, Roy and his crew are only a few years old. They have the emotional growth of a child; hence, every emotion is heightened. They've been designed and grown to be superior at their specific skills (off-world slave work, whether combat or pleasure or whatever models). The "fix" from Tyrell for the new generation of replicants (ie, Rachel) was the implantation of memories to even out their emotions so that there becomes no actual difference between a person that is designed and grown versus one born naturally. In the end, the question of "is Deckard a replicant" becomes meaningless as we've just watched a story where he is as human as any of us.
Really looking forward to the BR2049 reaction as it has the best line of both films that summarizes the moral and ethical questions posed in the films, of which I won't spoil the line here.
Thank you for saying this because I think they completely missed it.
"You've done a man's job, sir" also hints that Deckard is a replicant.
I thought all the replicants were, at that point, being implanted with memories. Leon like Rachel had his precious photos. Wasn't Rachel unique in that she was never told she was a replicant and she had no 4 year life span? If Deckard is a replicant, that would make them both unicorns.
@@MattMcQueen1 - No it doesn't. It's simply colloquial way of saying he completed a tough task.
@@horseshoe2blah201 - No. She was unique in that they gave her memories, which is the entire reason she didn't know she was a replicant. Since she had the emotional cushion of memories, there wasn't the same negative effect of a two or three year old's emotional maturity in a killing machine body, so they didn't have to safeguard against her developing emotions and not being able to deal with them. So the four-year lifespan was left out. Also, she's a prototype, so both were part of a new paradigm. If that would have worked out, then, in production, you get much more slave labor as you don't have to replace them every four years.
30:26 They DON'T have the memories implanted. That is unique to Rachel, the experimental model ❤
ORIGINALLY... deckard's unicorn dream was intended to be an implant gaff was aware of
The score for this film is what sticks with you forever. Took until 1994 to finally release a half baked version, while fans have put together more than 7 versions. Some complete.
Thanks for your reaction.
I'm glad someone competent as you guys watches this masterpiece.
Tip tier directing, amazing actors, crazy good scene design and Vangelis painting emotions with the soundtrack. A true work of art.
Hands down my favorite scifi flick. Sountrack is fantastic! That speech at the end by Roy was made up the night before they shot it.
Really!? That’s awesome. I think those lines are a great punchline to multiple of the themes in this movie. It took us a bit to understand what he was saying exactly but once you compare and contrast with what the movie is about it adds some nice depth to his words
@@OfficialMediaKnights It really did bring it all together. He always played a fantastic villain. You should check out the Hitcher. There is a bunch of different versions of Bladerunner even with Harrison narrating the whole movie. He never liked that version.
@@OfficialMediaKnights it gives you a glimpse into roy's life as a combat model replicant and is just perfectly vague enough so you have to think a little to actually get to that conclusion.... the "glittering c-beams" and the "attack ships on fire" are just enough to create an image in your mind without drifting into a clumsy exposition dump... exactly the kind of subtle worldbuilding i'm sorely missing in most of today's script writing and storytelling
The speech was much much longer and written by the screenwriter, Fancher. Hauer, however, thought it was too long and rewritten and condensed it to the final speech you see.
Another of my favorite lines from Batty is when he and Leon goes to the eye engineer. His quote from a William Blake poem, America:
"Fiery the angels fell; deep thunder rolled around their shores; burning with the fires of Orc" (sic) The line was Hauer's idea. A reference to rebellion and independence. Hats off to Hauer, RIP.
A side note, a similar thing happened in the movie, Jaws. Robert Shaw, who played Quint, the boat captain, in his speech in the Orca about his traumatic encounter with sharks, the actor thought the original lines were too long. He, like what Hauer did, rewritten and condensed it the night before the shooting of the scene. Hauer and Shaw, a testament to their great creative skills.
That's not entirely accurate. The bulk of it was written by Fancher and/or Peoples, but Hauer took it, stripped some of it out and added the specific (and excellent) final line, i.e. ....like tears in rain." Here is the original shooting script dialog:
I've seen things...
(long pause)
seen things you little people
wouldn't believe... Attack ships
on fire off the shoulder of Orion
bright as magnesium... I rode on
the back decks of a blinker and
watched c-beams glitter in the dark
near the Tanhauser Gate.
(pause)
all those moments... they'll be gone.
Love how the robotic replicants become more human while the humans become more robotic.
This!!! This is the true point of the film, I think, rather than the focus on Deckard being a replicant or human!
Replicants aren’t robots. They’re flesh and blood. Their genetic code was engineered by Tyrell and his employees to give them their desired characteristics. They’re not like the Terminator where they’re a robot underneath skin. They’re bio-engineered humans, not robots made to look human.
@@ClaytonMacleodI believe in the book they're androids, hence the title "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" and from what I've read of the book all of the animals are artificial/machine. And in this film Deckard refers to them as "like any other machine". They bleed yes, but if you wanted to make an android as close as possible to human you would have to give it some kind of artificial blood/vascular system.
If you've seen the sequel, however, they clearly went with the biologically engineered humans theme.
@@vinnylewis9245They're not talking about genetic design in the movie for no reason. Robots are involved only in as much as that's what they used to build, robots, but over time their design work evolved so much that they just started working with genes and organic material. "Like any other machine" is a reference to "we made them so they must serve us" and has practically nothing to do with actual machines. This isn't an indication that there's Terminators under that skin. It is merely an indication of how poorly the replicants are revered. They're not like us. They're just like machines and deserve no more respect than that. That's why he says "They're either a benefit or a hazard." right after that.
Look at what Chew was doing when Roy and Leon went to visit him. He was examining what his latest genetic code grew. He wasn't examining the latest parts he put together like some watchmaker. He was looking at the results of his latest iteration of his genetic code for eyeballs. He wasn't taking bits of camera and jello to make the camera look like an eyeball from the outside. He was simply making eyeballs as well as he could make eyeballs by designing genetic code that grows organic material into eyeballs. The same goes for every other part of their bodies. Sebastian worked on some of it. And he tells Roy and Pris that Tyrell was the one that designed their minds. It's all genetic work, not mechanical work.
The movie also tells you straight out that all the animals you see are artificial, because nobody can afford to have real ones. Deckard asks if the owl was artificial and Rachel tells him "Of course it is." And later, when Deckard asks Zhora if her snake was real she says "Of course it isn't real. You think I'd be working here if I could afford a real snake?" Both making it seem as though real animals are very uncommon in this time.
@@OfficialMediaKnightsThat was a discussion 35 years ago until interviews and documentaries put an end to it. It would've been a cheap and meaningless twist. Movie has a message that only makes sense when his humanity is put against that of replicants.
From Alien to Bladerunner. What a visionary Ridley Scott was here.
Unique movie for its time yet fed a thousand after.
A genre defining classic
remaking metropolis and the green slime almost scene by scene?
When Rachel says "I can't rely on my..." she's referring to her memories of intimate sexual and romantic interactions. That's why she's so frightened and confused -- she's feeling this onrush of new emotions and physical sensations for the first time despite whatever false memories she may have . As written, Deckard is trying to guide her through this new experience, but the general consensus seems to be that Ridley Scott handled it poorly. (Even during filming some on set referred to this scene as "the rape in the hallway.") As for Deckard not allowing Rachel to leave in the first place, we must consider the fact that once she steps foot out of his apartment she is a runaway replicant with a target on her back.
FWIW, decades ago it was considerd manly and VERY sexy for a man to "take" a woman like this, to release his passions. Tons of movies and shows did this. Women would swoon, wishing a man would be that passionate with them, for them to be the target of such desire.
Nowadays it's seen more as rapey. Bear in mind also that this is a noir film, so it's using tropes from even further back, a century now.
@@Aeroldoth3 Sad that raw passion is viewed in this context today by a lot of people. And "decades ago" - please!
@@tjtenser7828 i think its understandable but if more filmmakers could show passion just as strong as they did in the past but in other avenues it would make great difference in our understanding
@@Aeroldoth3 I don't quite agree - for the most part, even back in the dark ages of film such overly aggressive behavior towards a woman was seen not as acceptably manly and sexy but as abusive, and usually committed by characters we aren't meant to look up to or emulate. Even in silent films, the dastardly villain trying to "take advantage" of the fair maiden must be taken to task by the stalwart hero.
@@porflepopnecker4376I disagree in turn.
There's a distinction between the villian constantly hitting on a woman who clearly isn't interested and only wants to get away, and a "manly" man mesmerizing a woman with his sexiness before kissing her roughly on the lips.
Do you believe the filmmakers were portraying Ford's character as a villain or in a sexy light? Do you think Ford cornering Princess Leia while doing repairs, then kissing her before c3-po interupts was meant to be sexy or villainey?
This is one of my all time favorite films. "it's too bad they won't make a movie as good as this any time soon, but then again who does?".
More and more we’re starting to see foreign films take storytelling to the next level. Why? Because they’re taking risks. Smaller independent studios in the US have had their success but at the moment we are seeing this kind of storytelling predominately with foreign films. Loved the reference!
@@OfficialMediaKnights Very true, and thanks! 🙂
What’s happening to movies is happening to the west, everything is moving east.
@@OfficialMediaKnights Big studios are run by corporations now. Look at their attitude during the actors & writers strike. Art is unimportant to the suits, who just want big profits for churning out the same stuff over & over. In the golden age of films, studios had a "B Pictures" dept. for things they knew would not be huge.
I love to watch this film over and over again. First to understand all meanings, and ways of the ending. Then just to admire it like it's a beautiful moving painting.
Oh absolutely, this is one of those movies that has to be rewatched to fully appreciate all aspects! We had a fantastic time with it!
Thank you both for giving me the most intelligent reaction to my favourite film of all time, more than any other reactor on CZcams. They all miss what you both have commented on. This genre of film is cyberpunk/noir. The other reactors take the surface of the film as rote, without bothering to delve deeper into the story. Also Vangelis's score is a masterpiece in itself.
Also. how did Gaff (Edward James Olmos - long live commander Adama) know to create the unicorn origami figure, which is what Deckard dreamed? How does that mess with your head?
I remember watching a censored version of this as a kid and I loved it up until the end, where I was so annoyed/confused with the ending where the 'bad guy' just gives up and our 'hero' doesn't get some heroic victory. Glad our brains develop over time because now its one of my favourite movies ever and I absolutely love the ending, the tears in rain scene gets me emotional every time!
I love how Denise said the film felt dreamy, because that's exactly what Blade Runner is. I, personally, had to be in the right mood to really vibe with it. The unicorn section is something that Ridley fought very hard for. I'm not entirely sure why, but probably for some symbolism and maybe ambiguity? Regarding whether Deckard is human or not, Ridley has given his official answer, but I won't say here. ;)
Blade Runner is one of my all time favorite films. Within the Cyberpunk genre, it is second only to the original Ghost in the Shell from 1993 (I can never remember the exact year). I may have mentioned it before, but if you guys are into anime in any capacity then I definitely recommend a watch.
It definitely felt like one of those wild dreams you have after a good party 😂 Thoroughly enjoyed the visuals and atmosphere. And how it poses some pretty significant questions. Thank you for watching this with us and for the suggestion! We haven't gotten into anime yet but it is something we are open to!
Nope. He is not a replicant. Ridley Scott has not given the official answer. He is wrong.
About Ghost in the Shell, you should really watch it, and watch it in Japanese with subtitles. And you will start seeing a matrix got its inspiration.
Ridley Scott is losing his mind with age it seems like.
The whole 'what is Deckard' question is something literally everyone else involved with the film, writers included, disagrees with him about.
Ridley gave an answer about Deckard, but Denis Villneuve who directed the sequel gave a different answer -And I’m with Villeneuve.
A masterpiece, and IMO, its very late sequel was a definite worthy one. And what an audibly-stunning soundtrack
If they want another movie with a fantastic score by Vangelis, then they should watch "Chariots of Fire".
@@kenyabrunson4985 "1492: Conquest of Paradise" also has a great Vangelis score, although it's only a so-so movie.
2049 is definitely a worthy sequel, much to the chagrin of some purists.
Gosling is amazing in 2049
It's an unnecessary cheap sequel. It tries to "answer" questions that don't need to be answered for you...completely ruins the idea of the original movie.
Its so absolutely bonkers, how relevant the themes in this movie are, even now, probably more than ever, literally 42 years after this film was released. And what incredible shooting and filming talent is displayed here. Its still unparalleled in the cyberpunk setting. Absolute perfection ! The OST is pure perfection and atmosphere has never been better. The deep philosophical questions that come up, the morale compass, its all there and in right doses too. With no wasted shots or dialogue. Truly a marvel of a film, that I can never tire of, no matter how many times I have watched it. Cheers !
cyberpunk wasn't a thing yet when it came out.
You have hit the absolute honey pot with this cinematic gem. Didn't mention this title earlier because I assumed that you had already seen it. And you are correct, you have to have seen this movie before you watch the sequel. You'll be glad that you did, trust me.
Blade Runner is one of those movies that are the pinnacle of cinematography. The lighting, story-telling, acting, the set design. It is all top notch. The soundtrack was done by synthesizer god Vangelis. Was an instant classic at the time. And this movie has aged so well! Even after all this time the effects, sets etc. still hold up. It will even put quite a few of the big modern hit movies to shame, and then some! The story has so much more depth to it than it let's on initially. A lot of modern-day movies should take notes on how it's done. Can't wait for you to see the sequel of this masterpiece.
It's a good thing that you didn't watch Blade Runner 2049 before this one! The sequel is pretty much a continuation of this film! I liked it a lot...Ryan Gosling is in that one.
Ohhh we are so pumped for that one, glad we didn't watch it yet!
you will really enjoy it, its a worthy successor to this one @@OfficialMediaKnights
@@OfficialMediaKnights For me, Blade Runner 2049 is one of those rare sequels that is equal to or even surpasses the original. Denis Villeneuve was a perfect choice as Director. He understood the pacing and visuals needed to continue the story and it is just as melancholic as the original. Nominated for 5 Academy Awards, winning two.
I love the idea of artificial life/intelligence as it is approached in this world with these two movies.
Hands down one of the most badass pieces of Sci-Fi out there. A nexus of elite film making and masterful acting on every level. And now you HAVE to see the sequel. Really glad to see you react to this one. It's a longtime favorite of mine. On a slight tangent, so many of the shots in the film remind me so much of Alien. Like the ultra close-up shots of water trickling down the wall during the last fight, building the suspense, ever so slowly panning, leaving you with just the sound of Deckard breathing and the water trickling, before Roy suddenly bursts through the wall and grabs him. (Chef's kiss!!)
Also, I'd love to see you react to the recent Dune movie. They did an amazing job with it. It really is stunning.
When people ask me what my favourite movie is, I start thinking.
As soon as they say, sci fi... Blade runner in a millisecond
There are also 3 animated shorts that take place between the two movies.
Its crazy how many absolute classics Ridley Scott has made. The sequel is great as well.
Besides the stunning monologue I simply love how one of Roy's last acts was an act of mercy. Such a clever, hauntingly beautiful movie
In the 80s and before there wasnt really such a thing as "color grading"... that came with digital tech in the 90s. You had to select certain film stocks and you could optically tint the film, but most importantly youd have to light it correctly. Now you can change the whole color scheme with a few digital filters but back then, you had to know what your movie was gonna look like from the start.
That is a technical aspect we’re not too well versed in. It never crossed my mind until now how that too would’ve been different back then. Tinting the actual film sounds like an interesting process. But the pre production work must’ve been insane! Like you mentioned, lighting must’ve been something they thoroughly paid attention to. And seeing the results of how this film turned out I’d say they nailed that aspect completely. Everything from the hues to the atmospheric layering with lighting and fog/mist is fantastic.
@@OfficialMediaKnights BTW, The movie that gets the credit for being the first digitally color graded film is the Coen Bros "Oh Brother Where Art Thou" (2000), but "Jason X" did it first, it just got released a year after it was finished.
I think there are too much color grading in mordern films. Dune is almost monochrome in many scenes.
@@OfficialMediaKnights The making of Blade Runner is just as fascinating and deep as the movie itself.
@@davidpax Dune is supposed to be monochrome.
Another great reaction! "Blade Runner" is one of the best Ridley Scott/sci-fi/Harrison Ford movies ever made. It was way ahead of its time & stands the test of time.
As great as Harrison Ford is here, it was the late, great Rutger Hauer's Roy Batty who stole the show. He should have been Oscar-nominated. Other great Rutger Hauer movies you could react to: "Nighthawks," "Ladyhawke," "Blind Fury," "Batman Begins" & "Hobo With A Shotgun."
Other Harrison Ford suggestions: "Witness," "What Lies Beneath," "Working Girl" &"42." Other Ridley Scott movie suggestions: "The Martian," "Legend," "Black Hawk Down" & "American Gangster," the 2007 movie starring Denzel Washington & Russell Crowe.
I'm astonished that nobody's yet mentioned that Total Recall is based upon a short story (We Can Remember It For You Wholesale) by Philip K. Dick, who wrote the book that this film is based upon.
"Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" great damn book with a weird damn title which pretty much sums Philip K. Dick up. Thanks for reminding me about "we can remember it for you wholesale" need to go dig it up now and re-read it now 😁.
Might be more accurate to say that novel inspired this film, rather than the film is based on it, as the two really have very little in common beyond some superficial aspects.
@@troikas3353 whaaaatever, fella. 🙄
@@LarryLeeder Riddley Scott himself has said this, it's not like its some hot take. The book and the film have very little shared in common. Like, Deckard in the book has a wife and a subplot thread is him buying her a live pet goat which Rachael later kills. Even the lables Blade Runner and Replicant are film original. Blade Runner and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep are very different stories.
@@troikas3353 I mean I only did a book report on Androids in high school in the '80s, I'm very much aware of the differences. Chill with your Mood Organ.
The Tears in Rain speech was written by Rutger Hauer the night before they shot the climax. He excitedly called Ridley Scott to his trailer and read a poem he’d wrote that included the lines in the movie. Ridley was skeptical at first, but wound up loving the writing and they collaborated to include it in the movie scene. And the rest, they say, is history.
The soundtrack made by Vangelis, one of the greatest composer of all time.
It's a great mystery that when they made Bladerunner 2049, Vangelis was still alive and composing and they didn't even ask him if he wanted to be involved.
@@chefren77 REALLY? I never heard this!
Wow... now I am a little pissed ngl
i so miss my original NARRATED theatrical release VHS. the movie sounds too clean and digital on DVD
My favourite film of all time, it's an absolute masterpiece.
The "tears in rain" speech is in my opinion the greatest scene ever filmed and Rutger Hauer made it up himself, Ridley liked it so much he left it in.
The sequel is absolutely brilliant too.
didn't like the sequel at all. L.A. is crowded now (again), there's no quirkiness, the soundtrack is digital techno (PHOOEY!!) and it's pointlessly brutal
Actor Rutger Hauer passed away in 2019. Director Ridley Scott and screenwriter David Peoples have confirmed that Hauer significantly modified the original "Tears in Rain" speech. Critic Mark Rowlands described it as "perhaps the most moving death soliloquy in cinematic history".
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams... glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments... will be lost in time... like... tears... in rain. Time to die."
Roy showed his humanity & empathy when saving Decker’s life at the end, instead of killing him 🕊️
Love how you guys appreciate great film making
Thank you! There is so much to appreciate watching this. You can tell a lot of hard work went into making this film.
The visuals & sound are like witnessing a work of art.
@@OfficialMediaKnightsJust so you know… there will NEVER be a definitive Yes or No answer to the question of “Is he or isn’t he?”. Even with the MANY clues in the film that yes, Deckard is indeed a Replicant himself. In the end, it doesn’t even matter. This classic and influential film works completely regardless. Can’t wait to see your reactions to Blade Runner 2049. One of the rare film sequels actually worth a damn.
Amazingly, this movie was widely criticized upon release for sacrificing depth and character development in favor of special effects. In trying to point out the movie's supposed shallowness, these critics exposed their own. Fortunately, time has revealed it to be the endlessly thought-provoking classic that it is.
totally immersive world building with a twist of quirkiness that feels natural. I love the part where J.F. says "there's some of me in you" and the cuckoo clock rings. you kinda have to watch the film 40+ times to catch that bit
I saw this film in the theatre when it first premiered back in 1982, three years after ALIEN....fell in love with it instantly and i became an instant fan of director Ridley Scott's films and this film in particular....and have been ever since...it's good you delayed seeing the sequel until you see this film....it is a genuine sequel even more thought provoking....the musical score is by Vangelis.
BLADE RUNNER is based on Phillip K. Dick's novel DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP (1968).
NOPE! no matter how many times i hear that it whizzes me off as dick's book is almost NOTHING like BR. 2049 is, but BR is way more like metropolis... almost scene by scene
The unicorn is symbolic of Rachael. She was rare because she had no expiration date.
And we learn more about her in the sequel.
From the sequel you realize how unique she was not just her expiration date.
This movie really was so artistic and innovative for its time when it came out. So much more than just an action or scifi movie, it delves into existential themes.
Rutger Hauer's Tears in Rain monologue is iconic. He was dissatisfied with the monologue in the script, which was verbose and grandiose, so he rewrote it the night before and pared it down and it's perfect.
I’ve seen this movie many, many times. It is one of my favorites.
Here’s what people miss about the scene with Deckard stopping Rachel from leaving his place. If you take the scene out of the context, then it is a bad situation. However, in the progression of the film, Deckard is surprised to discover that Rachel is a replicant when he tests her at the Tyrell corporation. Rachel goes to see Deckard and he tells her she is a replicant. He feels bad that he hurt her feelings and realizes how different she is from other replicants he’s come across. Remember, he was forced back into being a Blade Runner. When Deckard was at the bar he called Rachel and invited for drinks, but she refused and hung up on him. Even though she told him “That’s not my kind of place.”, she still showed up there after Deckard killed Zhora. Rachel saw Deckard was an emotional wreck and saved him from Leon. They both are strong willed characters, and both are searching for their humanity. Rachel because she lost it when she found out she was a replicant and Deckard lost it from being a blade runner. Deckard stopped Rachel from leaving because he wanted to be sure that she was leaving or staying because she wanted to and not from some program she was coded to follow. He told her what to say to him but she said she didn’t think she could, then she expressed her own free will.
It’s a very layered film that is well written!
EXACTLY.
When Deckard hits Roy with the pipe, Roy exclaims "THAT'S the spirit!" - emphasizing both of their will to survive. He saves Deckard after showing him how important the struggle to survive truly is. He never intended to kill Deckard - he wanted him to understand his own determination to live.
Love this movie. Glad you picked the right version. I cannot wait for you to watch 2049. If you want to dig even deeper, read/listen to the novel this is based on - "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep"
Its interesting to watch the original cinema version of Bladerunner to see the changes the studio insisted on at release, mainly a voiceover from Ford and a few other small things. The movie I wished they would make was a prequel, Id love to see the offworld replicant rebellion.
OMG, the voiceover is staggeringly awful. Ford didn't want to do it, so he delivered it in a sluggish monotone. The writing itself wants to emulate classic film noir voiceovers, but ends up simply restating what we can clearly see for ourselves with little or no added insight. As for the happy ending the studio insisted upon, with Deckard and Rachel seen speeding away from the city in his spinner, I do like the fact that it emphasizes Rachel's unlimited lifespan. After all, Tyrell wouldn't bother to gift her with memories for the purpose of cushioning her inevitable emotions, simply to allow this new evolution in replicant technology to die prematurely. And if Deckard himself is an advanced model, which he surely would be, then it follows that he would have a normal lifespan as well.
Personally I don't have a huge issue with Ford's VO. It's not great; it's not terrible. It does add a certain noir-ish feel to the proceedings, but in places it's trying to explain the plot to us when it really isn't necessary. The tacked-on "happy ending" is the bigger crime, and the Director's Cut ends perfectly, with the elevator doors closing.
Remember this was made over Forty years ago. No CGI and even though I'm a big boy now, when I hear Roy say.. tears in rain.. I start crying
Amazing movie
This film is very much sci-fi and whatnot but it's also more philosophical than anything. It's so good. In the novel, Deckard owns an electric sheep while wanting to save to buy a real animal. So, it's a bit of irony for a human to own a fake sheep, which ties into the title of the novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?": if humans count sheep to sleep, do replicants/androids count electric sheep?
Apparently Phillip K. Dick got to see some footage of this film before he died and felt that it represented his vision well.
Also, if you love this film you'll love 2049.
That reminds of the fad of a pet character you could have on a tiny grey LCD screen thing you could carry in a pocket.
@@treetopjones737 Tamagotchi?
The term "cyberpunk" first apearead as a title of a short story written by Bruce Bethke in 1980 and published in "Amazing Stories" magazine in 1983.
The roots of the genre go back to the 60's (most of Philip K Dick's works were written back then) Ground zero for the look of cyberpunk city-scapes was a Metal Hurlant comic (published in the US as "Heavy Metal") by "Alien" writer Dan O'Bannon and Moebius called "The Long Tomorrow" created in 1976. Ridley Scott had Moebius for "Alien" but had Syd Mead and Ron Cobb for Blade Runner, whom he instructed to make 2019 LA look like "The Long Tomorrow" ("TLT" was also the source material for the "Harry Canyon" segment of the "Heavy Metal" animated movie) Along with the cityscape, many other ideas and themes were lifted directly from the comic including the detective in the flying car and a femme-fatale with a very familiar looking dress and hairstyle. "Aliens" fans will even get an explanation for the throwaway joke about "Arcturian poontang"
Another key creator of the look and feel of modern cyberpunk was another French comic artist Jean-Claude Mezieres, creator of "Valerian and Laureline." "The Fifth Element" drew heavily from "Harry Canyon" and "Valerian and Laureline," and Luc Besson had both Moebius and Mezieres on his production team for that movie. (Mezieres asked Besson why he didn't just adapt Valerian and Laureline and Besson didn't think FX tech was up to the task yet. He waited until 2017 to adapt it into "Valerian and The City of a Thousand Planets")
The "Godfather of Cyberpunk" is writer William Gibson whose seminal masterpiece "Neuromancer" was published in 1984, which first used the term "cyberspace" and was one of the first stories to predict and feature a VR internet. He was deep into writing it when he saw "Blade Runner" and had this to say in a recent interview: "I was afraid to watch Blade Runner in the theater because I was afraid the movie would be better than what I myself had been able to imagine. In a way, I was right to be afraid, because even the first few minutes were better. Later, I noticed that it was a total box-office flop, in first theatrical release. That worried me, too. I thought, Uh-oh. He got it right and nobody cares! Over a few years, though, I started to see that in some weird way it was the most influential film of my lifetime, up to that point. It affected the way people dressed, it affected the way people decorated nightclubs. Architects started building office buildings that you could tell they had seen in Blade Runner. It had had an astonishingly broad aesthetic impact on the world.
I met Ridley Scott years later, maybe a decade or more after Blade Runner was released. I told him what Neuromancer was made of, and he had basically the same list of ingredients for Blade Runner. One of the most powerful ingredients was French adult comic books and their particular brand of Orientalia-the sort of thing that Heavy Metal magazine began translating in the United States.
But the simplest and most radical thing that Ridley Scott did in Blade Runner was to put urban archaeology in every frame. It hadn’t been obvious to mainstream American science fiction that cities are like compost heaps-just layers and layers of stuff. In cities, the past and the present and the future can all be totally adjacent"
Around this same time, Japanese cyberpunk was developing across the Ocean, where artists like Katsuhiro Otomo and Masamune Shirow were coming up with the ideas that would become "Akira" "Ghost in The Shell" "Black Magic M-66" and "Appleseed"
15:55 "this is giving me noir vibes" That's baked into the genre. Cyberpunk is "high-tech/low-life" - legitimate society is oppressive, it's only in the criminal underworld where change and progress can happen. Many cyberpunk stories are about assembling crews for heists of various nature or law enforcers solving deeply existential mysteries and grappling with the dehumanization and erosion of civil rights they are a part of in enforcing the oppressive society.
Another movie that is consistently underestimated as a cyberpunk milestone is "Tron" (1982). It's not a movie that springs to mind immediately when you think about the genre, but it has many trappings of what would come to be known as cyberpunk, not least the first real cinematic depiction of cyberspace. (Also out-of-control AI, oppressive corporations, an attempted data heist, the use of trojan/virus data weapons, time dilation in and out of the machine interface etc.) It doesn't have much of the low-life sketchiness one typically associates with the genre (the "punk" half), but there are a lot of significant elements in play.
@@bonglesnodkins329 Good call!
" It doesn't have much of the low-life sketchiness one typically associates with the genre"
It's cyberpunk via Disney so nobody gets murdered (at least not in the "real world") but it does feature a disgraced hero forced to resort to criminal hacking and B&E to clear his name.
Since you guys like the cyberpunk aesthethic and/or feel of cyberpunk genre, i would also suggest you watch Dredd (2012) starring Karl Urban in the main role. It's based on a comic book character of the same name. I would like to say some extra stuff about the movie, but i fear i would spoil it.
People gloss over or miss the critique of capitalism in this film. "More human than human is our motto the Tyrell Corporation." He says it so fast it's easy to miss. And then when Roy says ". . . that's what it is to be a slave." It's a system of manufactured beings who are organic, not "robots". They are genetically engineered. Roy chose to spare him because at the end of his time because he loved life so much he didn't want to see even his enemy die (the original narration says this, but they removed the narration for this version).
Ah, yes. The movie that set the standards for the Cyperpunk genre. What a classic and fantastic ost.
Love that you reacted to this one! I'd love to see more Ridley Scott reactions. Maybe Thelma and Louise or The Last Duel if you haven't seen those? Love your channel!
When you have a movie where the screenwriter, director and star cannot agree on a main plot point - replicant or not ? - you have the makings of a legend. I'd encourage you to seek out the Theatrical release to see what we witnessed and fell in love with in 1982. The voice over is hated by some but I think it adds something and I'm glad I have it and two others on the BluRay release. Also the 3 hour making of documentary 'Dangerous Days' is definitely worth seeking out, as is an earlier documentary by UK critic Mark Kermode called 'On the Edge of Blade Runner'. And if you really want to do a deep dive into the battles between the studio and Ridley Scott seek out Paul M Sammon's definitive book 'Future Noir: The Making of Blade Runner'.
I also appreciate the voice over. It accentuates the noir feel.
Love the voice over too!❤
The number one person who hated the voice over is Harrison Ford.
I am so glad you have reacted to Blade Runner, One of the most influential SF films ever. The world-building of this film is amazing. I love the concept that the future is old reflected in the buildings that were added to rather than torn down and rebuilt. The climate crisis is shown by the constant rain. Roy's speech at the end always gets me.
"Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?" puts the dichotomy in the title.
but it's REALLY more of a metropilis reboot where 2049 is much closer to do androids dream of electronic sheep which is virtually NOTHING like blade runner. (chickenheads?!)
You got it totally right with the Noir vibes. Thank you for reacting to this Masterpiece and wait till you see the sequel.
OST by Vangelis it´s legendary. The atmosphere it´s unbelievable. One of the most awesome sci fi films ever, based on the book "Do androids dream of electric sheep?", by Philip K. Dick (I highly recommend you this book).
"Total Recall" and "Bladerunner" are both based on stories written by Phillip K Dick. The Total Recall story was named "We Can Remember it for you Wholesale" . Bladerunner was based off of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" The Tom Cruise movie "Minority Report" was a novella of the same name again written by Phillip K Dick.
I'm really jealous that you two get to watch this for the first time in 2023. It's one of my favorite films.
Rutger Hauer wrote the monologue that he gave at the end after saving Harrison's character. Beautifully written and performed. Unreal to me how amazing this film looks and it's OVER 40 years old! When I was in Industrial Design school back in the stone age - the early 1980's - one of our teachers (at the University of Illinois) was friends with one of the main set designers for this movie. He showed us some of the original sketches for this new film, Blade Runner, that was going to come out. We saw beautiful drawings of the flying cars, costumes and crowd / street scenes. It was very cool. Now you need to watch Blade Runner 2049! It is a great sequel.
You gotta watch blade runner 2049 now.
Also, you might like hell boy
Oh absolutely! We’re definitely watching 2049 😄
BTW: Towards the end when Harrison Ford's character enter Sebastian's building, that is not a set. It was shot at the BRADBURY BUILDING lobby in Downtown Los Angeles. I have been inside several times. Blade Runner is my favorite film EVER !! I've watched it at least 50 times !!
I like how you guys really break it down as far as questions and thoughts about movies.
For this one, when you mentioned how Deckard might have had a little glimmer in his eye - I don't think it was there but it does look like a small chance it could have been - but I like how you pay close attention to details like that.
Movies are so much better when they bring up intriguing questions to actually think about.
Cool movie. William Sanderson does a great job. He's been in so many things and is very underrated in my opinion.
I've never seen him turn in a bad performance. Highly underrated.
U guys are gonna LOVE the sequel I just know it! 👌🏻
We cannot wait for the sequel!! So glad we got to do this one!
This is the best example of how a film visually resists the passage of time in terms of image, those effects today look realistic and impressive, as incredible as it may seem they are not made in CGI, there is no CGI, because there was no such technology in those years, all you see are very well done miniatures.
And film layering technique.
i saw adam savage talk about this sometime ago, they would run the film through the camera sometimes over 20 times, laying effects on to the scene, as it was very much pre-cgi. which is why it looks so good even now 41 years later.
🍿 If you liked the ethical aspects, I recommend watching Ex Machina if you haven't.
Oh... And the physical scenes with Deckard and Rachael definitely feel bad and toxic. 😞
Glad it wasn't just us! That was probably the weirdest sequence in this film! We love the ethical aspect. Adding Ex Machina to our list. Thanks for the suggestion!
@@OfficialMediaKnights Ex Machina! Another favorite.
Yep Ex Machina's very good! Also 'Her' is another really good AI movie. @@OfficialMediaKnights
If you don't pay attention. She could easily get away if she wanted to ( strength ), and she says of her own will "put your hands on me."
Mind blowing fact: this movie was shot as if it was an old school, black and white film...so the visuals are profound, timeless. And yet it was also shot with cutting edge , full color, practical and next level special effects.
I was lucky enough to see this on a big screen - is was un-freaking believable! I love that Scott chose to do this film, which looks into the future - (well, back in 1982 it did) - in a very film noir style, which is a nod to the detective films of the past. Even after all this time, it still holds up. The set design is fantastic!!
Super important film for establishing the Cyberpunk aesthetic, along with the Japanese Anime film Akira. So many dystopian sci-fi takes the aesthetic from those two films. Nice job picking up on the Noir vibe...Decker's voice overs are similar to films like Double Indemnity and any number of noir films. Hint: the unicorn is related to the unicorn in Decker's dream of a unicorn.
Ohhh we can only imagine!! The aesthetic of this film is absolutely breathtaking!
@@OfficialMediaKnights You might want to see the original theatrical release with the voice over. People are pretty divided over whether they like the voice over, but it does add something interesting. There are also some other small differences that I actually think make it better than this final cut that you saw. Director's cuts are not always better.
You guys are TERRIFIC! Watching you is always engaging, so kudos to you 😊
As for the unicorn, how did the origami guy know that Deckard had dreams about unicorns? He couldn’t possibly have, unless… Deckard’s dreams were implanted, as well? Trippy as heck, as you said multiple times 😊
Keep up the great work!
Came to say this about the unicorn
Exactly! Gladdomeone said this... Ifs like the spinning piece at the end of Inception.
How do you know that Gaff knows that Deckard had a unicorn dream? We are never told or shown that. An alternative explanation (other than just coincidence, which is also possible) is that both Deckard and Gaff knew many more things about Rachel’s implanted memories than the few examples that Deckard confronted her with, that both knew that Rachel remembers dreams of unicorns, that this knowledge and his thinking of her as a special creature is what seeded Deckard’s sympathetic unicorn dream, that Gaff had no idea that Deckard had this dream, and that his origami unicorn is only trying to convey that both he and Deckard value Rachel’s specialness.
Any attempt to explain the unicorn dream and origami requires significant assumptions. What is actually in the movie is not 100% certain and definitive as to whether or not Deckard is a replicant. That ambiguity is what the principal screenwriter intended, and it carries through despite Scott’s later revisions.
This is one of my all time favorite movies! The atmosphere and sound are almost characters in their own right.
I went to see the sequel, 2049, with a good friend. He had never seen the original and didn't know anything about it but he thought it was amazing. I'm sure you'll enjoy it too.
This is one of the few elite science fiction films of all time. Big, complicated, thought-provoking themes and executed to perfection by the cast and crew. It was panned when originally release, because everyone was expecting Star Wars. Thank god we got something different that not only has held up and gained wide appreciation but has rightfully taken its place as a classic film.
After "Blade Runner," and you've already seen "Total Recall," that leaves "Minority Report" as the final story by Philip K. Dick in film.
So glad you enjoyed the visuals here. I can't think of another film that does it so well. If Decker was a replicant, then when he was called to do the test on Rachel it was another experiment, and a way to introduce the two advanced models who were not self-aware. The cop was a monitor, and comments like "You've done a MAN's job" stand out. The origamis are significant.
“…it’s too bad she won’t live. But then again WHO DOES?…”
Heard it was implied from that line that maybe that cop knew Decker was a replicant, also that Decker had a dream about unicorn and the cop left an origami unicorn outside Deckers apartment.
Thank you for watching this with us! Minority Report is on our list. Can’t wait to watch!
That line can be said about a human who doesn't have long. Then again, who does? Truth of life.
Nope - A Scanner Darkly, the rotoscope film with Keanu Reeves is also Philip K Dick. Then I believe there is a series of The Man in the High Tower - but I haven't watched it as I heard bad things about the adaption
@@milknosugarta You can call "A Scanner Darkly" a film, I guess, but it's not live action. Likewise, "The Man in the High Tower" is not a film, it's a series.
If you watch the sequel Blade runner 2049, there are 3 short films on youtube. They bridged the 2 movies together with them.
Ohhh that's awesome, we had no idea!! We'll definitely check those out! Thank you for recommending them!
Even though Roy's speech at the end is brilliant, what always have hit me the most is: "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it's like being a slave." Chills
I was in high school when this came out. Harrison Ford was all the rage. Even Rutger Hauer and Daryl Hannah were on the rise. This movie was trippy then and just as trippy today. I think audiences (and movie execs) of the day were not ready for dystopian stories until this movie, Total Recall, Terminator, and the rest started to come out. It is very interesting to see today's young people enjoy our old films.
The unicorn origami was put there to suggest Dekkard is a replicant himself. He dreamed of a unicorn. The origami hints they know what he dreamed of. Brilliant.
I always thought the origami unicorn that he left behind meant he was maybe telling Decker he was a replicant because he knew of his dream about the Unicorn he had earlier in the film so was that dream implanted.
Exactly how I see it too.
All the replicants are associated with an animal too. Roy, a combat model, adopts the wolf in the final sequence of stalking Deckard, The acrobatic Priss adopts raccoon-esque face makeup after Sebastian finds her in the trash, the infiltration model Zhora adopted a snake companion and tattoo, and the ponderous Leon is introduced to us with the test question of the tortoise. Rachel's first line in the film is also asking Deckard's opinion on the Owl just after it flew in from the same direction she enters the scene. Given those associations, then Deckard's totem being a Unicorn is pretty fitting if he was a replicant that, unlike Rachel, doesn't even remotely suspect it as it would make him unique.
@@troikas3353A unicorn does not signify uniqueness. There is not a single unicorn in mythology, but rather they are a magical species. A unicorn signifies an instance of special or even magical quality, not a singular, unique entity.
@@markhamstra1083
Not only can it be a symbol for something unique, it's literally in the definition;
"unicorn
noun
uni·corn ˈyü-nə-ˌkȯrn
plural unicorns
[...]
2
: something unusual, rare, or unique"
@@troikas3353 Congratulations, you found a self-contradictory definition in a descriptivist dictionary that accommodates misuses of words. There can’t consistently be both a plural form and “unicorn” having the meaning unique - “unique” means there is only one, not a plurality.
I stand by my original point: “unicorn” properly used does not designate uniqueness, but rather specialness that is difficult to obtain.
I’m almost 70 now but this is arguably still my favorite sci-fi movie. Kinda wish we had replicants like Rachel for lonely seniors now.😎
When I was a teenager I worked at a movie theater and we had this movie. A lot of theater goers did not like this when it opened; they were expecting another Star Wars. But we had a consistent audience of hard sci fi fans who kept coming back to see it again and again. It took me several viewings (which, luckily for me, I didn't have to pay for) before I started to "get it". Another great reaction, Knights. Thanks!
Oh hell yes! One of my favourite movies. Gotta be the Final Cut, though! Regarding the unicorn at the end, the guy who folds the paper animals made a unicorn, which Deckard dreams about... but how could he have known Deckard dreamed about unicorns? Unless.... he read his....file? ;)
It is!
Can't go into it "completely blind." Gotta figure out if there are different versions, which one is the best, etc.
I hope you also react to Blade Runner 2049, personally I think it's even better than this movie in a lot of ways
Both Blade Runner and 2049 were underappreciated on release sadly. The original has grown into a cult classic, it's my hope 2049 will as well due to its excellence (on cinematography and score alone it should)
Sometimes it takes more than one viewing with certain films to truly connect with what was being said. We truly appreciated both the score and cinematography in this and can’t wait to see the sequel just so that we can compare how we’ve advanced.
In the original theatrical edition, you find out at the end Rachel didn't have an 4 year expiration.
Batty with the nail in his hand lifting up Ford at the end is a reference to Christ on the cross lifting up man, saving him from his sins. Took me many times watching it to see something that was so obvious. Magical moment. Saw it three times in the theatre in 1982 and many times since.
I like how they don't confirm whether he's a replicant or not and instead leave it to audience interpretation. I always like it better, because that shows the director truly trusts and respects the audience.
ironic to say that, because everyone involved in the movie EXCEPT Ridley Scott leaves it to interpretation
You're both observant and intelligent reactors. Did you know there was no CGI at all in the making of this? Just in-camera tricks, models, flares, smoke and matte paintings. There's a 'bible' on the making of this masterpiece called "Future Noir - The Making of Blade Runner" by Paul M. Sammon. They nearly cast Dustin Hoffman as Deckard.
Imagine Rachael waking up one day thinking she was human then discovering she's not, her very memories belong to someone else. She could not rely on them. The Nexus 6 bunch did not have memory implants so they were like 4 year olds in adult bodies, that's why they like toys and games and their emotions are basic.
Most people crap on the theatrical release because of the narration but it explains some things you don't get otherwise. As for Deckard being a replicant that's what the memory of the unicorn is about. Ridley Scott believed Deckard was a replicant, Ford did not.
When you walk through older Kowloon - where the streets are too narrow and the hills too steep for regular size buses, and new buildings tower over and around the older, smaller buildings like a gang of school yard bullies - you can't help but think of "Blade Runner". I bet the people crowding those streets feel direct sunlight for three hours a day tops because they're at the bottom of a glass and steel canyon surrounding them. Really enjoyed this vid. Thanks!
There is a video game, Bladerunner, which takes place during the movie. You play as a young Bladerunner hunting down Replicants, sometimes nearly crossing paths with Deckard (but never meeting him). The interesting thing: Each time you start a new game, it randomly selects which of the main characters is human and which one is a Replicant. Even down to the player's character.
If for whatever reason anyone still didn't think Ridley Scott showing them this movie MUST change their mind. He has made some incredible and unforgettable movies, but Blade Runner is just such a masterpiece in my opinion. Big credits also go to the amazing cast of course, but just how the movie is presented is so unnerving and oppressive and dark it always gives me chills.
I love the way Scott shows us how overcrowded the city is. You can see multiple times people passing in front of the camera, blocking our view like if we were there.
Back in this 80's times, that running troughthe windows scene while being shoot was one of the best stuntmen moments every recorded. It was a big thing, back then; even it is sugarglass, with this speed and momentum, you can easily can lose an eye, or a face scratch for life.
Bladerunner is THE original Zoom and Enhance... :)
One of the best movies ever. Great story, acting, set design, score, cinematography, color...the whole nine. Still holds up today. This is the O.G.